PROPERTY D SLIDES

1
PROPERTY D SLIDES

• 3-17-16
• Saint Patricks Day
• National Corned Beef Cabbage Day

2
Thursday March 17 Music to Accompany
ShapiraBarbra Streisand, The Way We Were (1974)

• On Course Page by 1230 Today On Course Page
  by 1230 Tomorrow

• Chapter 5 Materials
• Updated Syllabus Assignment Sheet
• Info Memos for Chapters 1 and 2
• Rough Schedule for Feedback on Submitted Sample
  Exam Answers

• Chapter 4 Tests from Fall 2010, Spring 2013,
  Spring 2014
• Complete Answers Explanations for Sample
  Question Bank and all Posted Tests
• Instructions Page for Your Test
• Chapter 4 Syllabus to be Attached to Your Test

3
OLYMPIC Problem 4I Contd
EEL GLACIER
4
Olympic (4I) O conveys "to J and her heirs so
long as the premises are not used for sale of
beer, wine, or liquor, and if beer, wine, or
liquor is sold on the premises, O retains a right
to re-enter the premises."

• J opens a restaurant that serves several dishes
  cooked with wine or flamed with brandy and at
  Sunday brunch offers a free glass of champagne.
• The restaurant is successful, and 11 years after
  its opening D wants to buy it and add a bar.
  Advise D.

5
Olympic (4I) O conveys "to J and her heirs so
long as the premises are not used for sale of
beer, wine, or liquor, and if beer, wine, or
liquor is sold on the premises, O retains a right
to re-enter the premises."

• MULTI-STEP ANALYSIS
• FSD or FSCS? (Last Time Arguments Both Ways)
• CONDITION VIOLATED? (Last Time Arguments Both
  Ways)
• EFFECT OF VIOLATION?
• If FSD Poss. of Reverter?
• If FSCS Rt. of Entry
• ADVICE RE PURCHASE

6
Olympic (4I) O conveys "to J and her heirs so
long as the premises are not used for sale of
beer, wine, or liquor, and if beer, wine, or
liquor is sold on the premises, O retains a right
to re-enter the premises."

• Effect of Violation if
• J has FSD O has Possibility of Reverter
• O gets legal title at moment of violation.
• If sufficient time has passed, J may have title
  through adverse possession.
• Effect of Violation if FSCS Rt. of Entry?

7
Olympic (4I) O conveys "to J and her heirs so
long as the premises are not used for sale of
beer, wine, or liquor, and if beer, wine, or
liquor is sold on the premises, O retains a right
to re-enter the premises."

• Effect of Violation if
• J has FSCS O has Right of Entry
• Assuming O has not acted, O still has RE
• If O is aware of Julias use of alcohol, may be
  held to have waived the right to enforce
  regarding these kinds of uses of alcohol.

8
Olympic (4I) O conveys "to J and her heirs so
long as the premises are not used for sale of
beer, wine, or liquor, and if beer, wine, or
liquor is sold on the premises, O retains a right
to re-enter the premises."

• MULTI-STEP ANALYSIS
• FSD or FSCS?
• CONDITION VIOLATED?
• EFFECT OF VIOLATION? (depends on FSD or FSCS)
• ADVICE RE PURCHASE?

9
Olympic (4I) O conveys "to J and her heirs so
long as the premises are not used for sale of
beer, wine, or liquor, and if beer, wine, or
liquor is sold on the premises, O retains a right
to re-enter the premises."

• J opens a restaurant that serves several dishes
  cooked with wine or flamed with brandy and at
  Sunday brunch offers a free glass of champagne.
• The restaurant is successful, and 11 years after
  its opening D wants to buy it and add a bar.
• Possible Advice to D?

10
(4I) Plausible Advice to Donald Includes

• Buy both present estate and future interest (or
  all rights of both J and O) to merge into fee
  simple absolute.
• Serve free liquor raise prices (and argue
  waiver if O questions)
• Make purchase contingent on J insuring right to
  use alcohol (winning suit re adverse possession/
  waiver/etc. buying future interest/waiver from
  O)
• Find out if D is willing and able to sell
  beer/wine on nearby site for people to take into
  restaurant.
• QUESTIONS ON 4I?

11
(4I) Plausible Advice to Donald

• Test Note 5
• Test Will Include At Least One Question Focused
  on Giving A Client This Type of Advice.
• E.g., Based on Facts of 4I, I might ask
• Assume that Js restaurant is successful. 11
  years after its opening, your client D wants to
  buy it and add a bar. Which of the following
  suggestions would it be helpful for you to make
  to D?

12
EXAM TIP Which of the Following Arguments
Does Not Support ?

• Can Arise in Context of
• Fee Simple v. Life Estate (White, Prob. 4O)
• FSD v. FSCS (Mahrenholz, Prob. 4I)
• Whether a Condition is Valid (Prob. 4O, Shapira)
• Advice Question (just described)
• Timing Ambiguities (after Shapira)

13
EXAM TIP Which of the Following Arguments
Does Not Support ?

• For an Argument to Support a Particular Legal
  Result (or for Advice to be Helpful)
• It Must Be Legally and Factually Correct and
• It Must Logically Suggest that the Result is More
  Likely or More Desirable Than the Alternative

14
In 2006, Brian grants Mason-acre to Dolly for
life, then to Jessica so long as she never tries
to sell Mason-acre, otherwise to Mike and Mili.

• At the time of the grant, Jessica has a
• (a) Vested remainder in fee simple determinable.
• (b) Vested remainder in fee simple absolute.
• (c) Vested remainder in fee simple on executory
  limitation.
• (d) Vested remainder subject to divestment.
• Take a moment and try this.

15
In 2006, Brian grants Mason-acre to Dolly for
life, then to Jessica so long as she never tries
to sell Mason-acre, otherwise to Mike and Mili.

• At the time of the grant, Jessica has a
• (a) Vested remainder in fee simple determinable.
• (b) Vested remainder in fee simple absolute.
• (c) Vested remainder in fee simple on executory
  limitation.
• (d) Vested remainder subject to divestment.
• Why is (b) the correct answer?

16
Conditions Additional Information

• Unacceptable Conditions
• Problem 4O
• Shapira
• Timing Issues

17
Unacceptable Conditions

• Conditions So Abhorrent

18
Unacceptable Conditions

• Conditions So Abhorrent
• You Cant Even Impose Them
• on Your Own Children

19
Unacceptable Conditions

• Total Restraint on Alienation

20
Unacceptable Conditions

• In 2006, Brian grants Mason-acre to Dolly for
  life, then to Jessica so long as she never tries
  to sell Mason-acre, otherwise to Mike and Mili.
• Total Restraint on Alienation is Invalid

21
Unacceptable Conditions

• In 2006, Brian grants Mason-acre to Dolly for
  life, then to Jessica so long as she never tries
  to sell Mason-acre, otherwise to Mike and Mili.
• Total Restraint on Alienation is Invalid
• Pencil Out Unlawful Condition (and executory
  interest that turns on it)

22
Unacceptable Conditions

• In 2006, Brian grants Mason-acre to Dolly for
  life, then to Jessica so long as she never tries
  to sell Mason-acre, otherwise to Mike and Mili.
• Total Restraint on Alienation is Invalid
• Pencil Out Unlawful Condition (and executory
  interest that turns on it)
• Result is Vested Remainder in Fee Simple Absolute
  (2006 Today)

23
Unacceptable Conditions

• In 2006, Brian grants Mason-acre to Dolly for
  life, then to Jessica so long as she never tries
  to sell Mason-acre, otherwise to Mike and Mili.
• Exam Question Fall 2007 Spring 2010
• 1st Time Nasty b/c New at End of Test (1/63
  students got it)
• 2d Time (with warning) about 45 got it.
• READ CAREFULLY!!

24
Unacceptable Conditions

• Total Restraint on Alienation
• Partial Restraint OK if Reasonable

25
Unacceptable Conditions

• Total Restraint on Alienation
• Partial Restraint OK if Reasonable
• Most Restrictions Restrain Alienation to Some
  Extent
• If too burdensome/weird could treat as too much
  restraint (b/c nobody will purchase)
• See Casebook at P565-66
• Maybe so long as the owner stays on the parcel
  every night.

26
Unacceptable Conditions

• Total Restraint on Alienation
• Partial Restraint OK if Reasonable
• Most Restrictions Restrain Alienation to Some
  Extent
• Use Restrictions (Use Only by X?)
• OK if Charitable
• Some jurisd Non-Charitable Unreas. Restraint
  on Alienation

27
Unacceptable Conditions

• Total Restraint on Alienation
• Doing Criminal Acts
• To Suki if she murders Ricky

28
Unacceptable Conditions

• Total Restraint on Alienation
• Doing Criminal Acts
• Total Restraint on Marriage Generally Barred
• Some Jurisd Maybe OK if Life Estate
• Some Jurisd allow reasonable partial restraints
• E.g., So long as she doesnt marry until she
  turns 25
• Well explore with Problem 4O Shapira

29
Unacceptable Conditions

• Total Restraint on Alienation
• Doing Criminal Acts
• Total Restraint on Marriage Generally Barred
• Encouraging Divorce (Evil In-Laws Grant)
• To Sansa so long as she divorces Tyrion

30
Unacceptable Conditions

• Total Restraint on Alienation
• Doing Criminal Acts
• Total Restraint on Marriage Generally Barred
• Encouraging Divorce (Evil In-Laws Grant)
• Grant Penalizing Divorce Seems to be OK
• To Sansa for Life, but if she divorces Tyrion,
  to Jon

31
Unacceptable Conditions

• Total Restraint on Alienation
• Doing Criminal Acts
• Total Restraint on Marriage Generally Barred
• Encouraging Divorce
• Commonly Protected Characteristics
• Race-Based Limitations (Unenforceable)
• Sex-Based Upheld (At Least w/in Family)
• Religion (Well Discuss w Shapira)

32
Unacceptable Conditions

• Total Restraint on Alienation
• Doing Criminal Acts
• Total Restraint on Marriage Generally Barred
• Encouraging Divorce
• Commonly Protected Characteristics
• Questions?

33
Conditions Additional Information

• Unacceptable Conditions
• Problem 4O
• Shapira
• Timing Issues

34
ACADIA Problem 4O
Sunrise
35
Acadia (4O) Archie in will To my wife Edith,
for her use benefit, so long as she remains
unmarried. Residue to daughter Gloria.

• Gloria is not Ediths child.
• Edith moves in with male friend, Sherman.
• Edith then dies, devising all her property to
  Sherman.
• devising means?

36
Acadia (4O) Archie in will To my wife Edith,
for her use benefit, so long as she remains
unmarried. Residue to daughter Gloria.

• Note on Future Interests Created in Wills
• The future interest that is retained by Archie
  (when he grants present interest to Edith) then
  passes to Gloria through the residuary clause.
• For purposes of naming the property rights
  involved, we treat this future interest as being
  held initially by Archie (the grantor), because
  it is not explicitly described as being granted
  to a third party.

37
Acadia (4O) Archie in will To my wife Edith,
for her use benefit, so long as she remains
unmarried. Residue to daughter Gloria.

• Three Qs/Ambiguities I Said Wed Discuss
• Life Estate Determinable v. Fee Simple
  Determinable?
• Is condition restraining second marriage void?
• Does cohabitation violate a restraint on
  marriage?
• Then Well Work Through Decision Tree

38
Acadia (4O) Archie in will To my wife Edith,
for her use benefit, so long as she remains
unmarried. Residue to daughter Gloria.

• (Q1) Arguments Supporting
• Fee Simple Determinable
• (as opposed to Life Estate Determinable?)

39
Acadia (4O) Archie in will To my wife Edith,
for her use benefit, so long as she remains
unmarried. Residue to daughter Gloria.

• Arguments Supporting FSD Include
• Presumption of Fee Simple if Today
• No Explicit Reference to Life
• No Explicit Gift Over Listed (See White v. Brown)
• Arguments Supporting Life Estate Determinable?

40
Acadia (4O) Archie in will To my wife Edith,
for her use benefit, so long as she remains
unmarried. Residue to daughter Gloria.

• (Q1) Arguments Supporting Life Estate
  Determinable Include
• Presumption of Life Estate if at Common Law
• Use and Benefit Sounds Like Life Estate (Hard
  to Use Land After Death)
• Condition/Language is Consistent with Intent to
  Provide Shelter/Support for Edith During Her
  Lifetime
• Reasonable to Think Archie would try to Protect
  Gloria (not Ediths daughter)

41
Acadia (4O) Archie in will To my wife Edith,
for her use benefit, so long as she remains
unmarried. Residue to daughter Gloria.

• Caselaw in many states today interpreting for
  use and benefit
• Majority View creates Fee Simple
• Minority View creates Life Estate

42
Acadia (4O) Archie in will To my wife Edith,
for her use benefit, so long as she remains
unmarried. Residue to daughter Gloria.

• Majority View
• E has Fee Simple Determinable
  
• What is Remaining Future Interest in Archie
  (passed to Gloria through residuary clause)?

43
Acadia (4O) Archie in will To my wife Edith,
for her use benefit, so long as she remains
unmarried. Residue to daughter Gloria.

• Majority View
• E has Fee Simple Determinable
  
• A ? G Possibility of Reverter

44
Acadia (4O) Archie in will To my wife Edith,
for her use benefit, so long as she remains
unmarried. Residue to daughter Gloria.

• Minority View
• E has Life Estate Determinable
  
• What is Remaining Future Interest in Archie
  (passed to Gloria through residuary clause)?

45
Acadia (4O) Archie in will To my wife Edith,
for her use benefit, so long as she remains
unmarried. Residue to daughter Gloria.

• Minority View
• E has Life Estate Determinable
  
• A? G Possibility of Reverter Reversion
• Merges into Reversion

46
Acadia (4O) Archie in will To my wife Edith,
for her use benefit, so long as she remains
unmarried. Residue to daughter Gloria.

• (Q2) If Edith had never married, condition
  probably would be void as against public policy.
• (Allowed for life estates in a few states.)
• Should we treat condition restraining second
  marriage differently from one restraining first
  marriage?

47
Acadia (4O) Archie in will To my wife Edith,
for her use benefit, so long as she remains
unmarried. Residue to daughter Gloria.

• (Q2) Is condition restraining second marriage
  void as against public policy?
• Policy Concerns
• As right to control his property (and nice
  Alvarez point re protecting Gloria) v. Es right
  to control her own life
• Stereotypes about love and sexuality in older
  persons,
• Court probably more likely to allow condition if
  it views Es interest as just a life estate for
  support.

48
Acadia (4O) Archie in will To my wife Edith,
for her use benefit, so long as she remains
unmarried. Residue to daughter Gloria.

• (Q2) Is condition restraining second marriage
  void as against public policy? Result
• If not void, nothing changes
• If void, pencil out condition

49
Acadia (4O) Archie in will To my wife Edith,
for her use benefit, so long as she remains
unmarried. Residue to daughter Gloria.

• If condition void, pencil out condition
• To my wife Edith, for her use benefit,
• so long as she remains unmarried.

50
Acadia (4O) Archie in will To my wife Edith,
for her use benefit, so long as she remains
unmarried. Residue to daughter Gloria.

• If condition void, pencil out condition
• To my wife Edith, for her use benefit,
• so long as she remains unmarried.
• Resulting Interests
• Majority E Fee Simple Absolute
• Some E Life Estate G Reversion
• If Void, What Happens when E dies?

51
Acadia (4O) Archie in will To my wife E, for
her use benefit, so long as she remains
unmarried. Residue to G. E then dies leaving
all property to S.

• If condition void, resulting interests
• Majority E Fee Simple Absolute
• When E Dies, S gets FSA through Es will.
• Some E Life Estate G Reversion
• When E dies, Life Estate ends, and G has FSA.

52
(4O) Acadia To my wife E, for her use
benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.
Residue to Gloria. E shacks up with Sherman. E
dies devises everything to S

• (Q3) Does cohabitation violate a restraint on
  marriage?
• Only need to resolve if condition is valid.
• ARGUMENTS?

53
(4O) Acadia To my wife E, for her use
benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.
Residue to Gloria. E shacks up with Sherman. E
dies devises everything to S

• Does cohabitation violate a restraint on
  marriage?
• Only need to resolve if condition is valid.
• Discussion Literal Argument v. Inconsistency w
  Grantors Purpose (both re Edith re Gloria)
  (cf. Mahrenholz)
• Restatement Position
• Not a Violation
• For Restatement to Address, Must Have Come Up
  Pretty Often
• Other Reasons Not to Marry from Pensions Social
  Security

54
(4O) Acadia To my wife E, for her use
benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.
Residue to Gloria. E shacks up with Sherman. E
dies devises everything to S

• (Q3) Does cohabitation violate a restraint on
  marriage?
• Only need to resolve if condition is valid.
• Since arguments both ways, need to follow
  through for both possibilities for both possible
  readings of grant

55
(4O) Acadia A in Will To my wife E, for her
use benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.
Residue to G. E shacks up with Sherman. E dies
devises everything to SMinority E LED G
Reversion (incl. Poss. of Reverter).

• If Condition is Violated?

• If Condition is Not Violated?

56
(4O) Acadia A in Will To my wife E, for her
use benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.
Residue to G. E shacks up with Sherman. E dies
devises everything to SMinority E LED G
Reversion (incl. Poss. of Reverter).

• If Condition is Violated?
• E immediately loses title
• Gs Poss of Reverter ? FSA
• E Dies?

• If Condition is Not Violated?
• Parties Interests Dont Change
• E Dies?

57
(4O) Acadia A in Will To my wife E, for her
use benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.
Residue to G. E shacks up with Sherman. E dies
devises everything to SMinority E LED G
Reversion (incl. Poss. of Reverter).

• If Condition is Violated?
• E immediately loses title
• Gs Poss of Reverter ? FSA
• E Dies?
• E has no interest to pass on
• G FSA

• If Condition is Not Violated?
• Parties Interests Dont Change
• E Dies?
• Es Life Estate ends
• Gs Reversion ? FSA
• G FSA

58
(4O) Acadia A in Will To my wife E, for her
use benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.
Residue to G. E shacks up with Sherman. E dies
devises everything to SMajority E FSD G
Poss. of Reverter

• If Condition is Violated?
• E immediately loses title
• Gs Poss of Reverter ? FSA

• If Condition is Not Violated?
• Parties Interests Dont Change

59
(4O) Acadia A in Will To my wife E, for her
use benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.
Residue to Gloria. E shacks up with Sherman. E
dies devises everything to SMajority E FSD
G Poss. of Reverter

• If Condition is Violated?
• E immediately loses title
• Gs Poss of Reverter ? FSA
• E Dies?
• E has no interest to pass on
• G FSA

• If Condition is Not Violated?
• Parties Interests Dont Change
• E Dies What Happens?

60
(4O) Archie in will To my wife E, for her use
benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.
Residue to As daughter G (not Es daughter). E
shacks up with Sherman. E dies devises
everything to S

• Final Branch of Decision Tree Edith Dies
• Majority Condition Valid No Violation
• Edith has FSD Gloria has Possibility of Reverter
• What happens to Condition When Edith Dies?

61
(4O) Archie in will To my wife E, for her use
benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.
Residue to As daughter G (not Es daughter). E
shacks up with Sherman. E dies devises
everything to S

• Final Branch of Decision Tree Edith Dies
• Majority Condition Valid No Violation
• Edith has FSD Gloria has Possibility of Reverter
• What happens to Condition When Edith Dies?
• Edith Cant Remarry After Death (As Far as We
  Know ?)
• Thus Condition Can Never Occur
• So Condition Effectively Disappears
• Sherman has Fee Simple Absolute Glorias
  Interest Fails

62
COMPARE

• To E her heirs so long as she remains
  unmarried.
• Condition limited to E, so ends at Es death.
• Successors after that take Fee Simple Absolute
• To E her heirs so long as alcohol is never
  sold on the premises.
• Condition not limited to E, so it survives her.
• Successors take Fee Simple Determinable.

63
Qs on Problem 4O?
64
Tomorrow

• Well Complete Shapira Timing Issues
• Materials on Rule against Perpetuities
• Rule itself Not on Test Information Only
  (NOTIO)
• Grants addressed fair game for identification,
  vesting failing
• Review Problems Everglades (4P/4S) Sequoia
  (4Q/4R) Be Prepared to
• Identify List of Contestable Issues (as I did for
  you on 4I 4O)
• Work Through Flow Chart of Possible Iterations
  (as we did for Mahrenholz 4O)
• Ill Post Slides/Write-Ups for All

65
Conditions Additional Information

• Unacceptable Conditions
• Problem 4O
• Shapira
• Timing Issues

66
BADLANDS DQ4.13-4.15
NORBECK PASS
67
Badlands DQ4.13? SHAPIRA DISTINCTIONS ?

• Well Explore Shapira Reasoning by Looking at
  Five Key Distinctions Drawn by the Opinion
  (Listed on Course Page)

68
Badlands DQ4.13? SHAPIRA DISTINCTION 1 ?

• Gift conditioned upon religious faith of
  beneficiary ?
• v.
• Gift conditioned upon marriage to person of
  particular faith ?
• Why Relevant?

69
Badlands DQ4.13? SHAPIRA DISTINCTION 1 ?

• Gift conditioned upon religious faith of
  beneficiary ? v.
• Gift conditioned upon marriage to person of
  particular faith ?
• Coercing Belief ? v. Conduct ?
• Administrability

70
Badlands DQ4.13? SHAPIRA DISTINCTION 1 ?

• Gift conditioned upon religious faith of
  beneficiary ? v.
• Gift conditioned upon marriage to person of
  particular faith ?
• Coercing Belief ? v. Conduct ?
• Note View of Marriage in 1974
• Can Use Case to Support Conditions Requiring
  Conduct Affecting Religious Concerns but not
  Coercing Belief
• Administrability

71
Badlands DQ4.13? SHAPIRA DISTINCTION 1 ?

• Gift conditioned upon religious faith of
  beneficiary ? v.
• Gift conditioned upon marriage to person of
  particular faith ?
• Administrability Compare
• ?To Pigpen, so long as the kitchens and bathrooms
  are always kept very clean.
• ?To Schroeder, so long as he never plays any work
  by Beethoven on the piano.

72
Badlands DQ4.13? SHAPIRA DISTINCTION 1 ?

• Gift conditioned upon religious faith of
  beneficiary ? v.
• Gift conditioned upon marriage to person of
  particular faith ?
• Administrability Compare
• ? To Lucy so long as she remains a member of the
  Society of Friends.
• ? To Linus, so long as he remains a good
  Catholic.
• QUESTIONS?

73
Badlands DQ4.13? SHAPIRA DISTINCTION 2 ?

• Gift conditioned upon divorce ?
• v.
• Gift conditioned upon marriage to person of
  particular faith (maybe ?)
• Why Relevant?

74
Badlands DQ4.13? SHAPIRA DISTINCTION 2 ?

• Gift conditioned upon divorce ? v.
• Gift conditioned upon marriage to person of
  particular faith (maybe ?)
• Court Latter not sufficient to encourage fake
  marriage divorce.
• Grantee cant avoid condition by saying I will
  act in bad faith (this concern arises regarding
  many legal issues).

75
Badlands DQ4.13? SHAPIRA DISTINCTION 3 ?

• Conditional gift with gift over to third party
• v.
• Conditional gift without gift over
• Comprehensive Estate Plan (likely ?)
• v. In Terrorem Condition (maybe ?)

76
Badlands DQ4.13? SHAPIRA DISTINCTION 4 ?

• Forcing a marriage as a condition of a completed
  gift ?
• v.
• Withholding gift until marriage made ?
• Why Relevant?

77
Badlands DQ4.13? SHAPIRA DISTINCTION 4 ?

• Forcing a marriage as a condition of a completed
  gift ?
• v. Withholding gift until marriage made ?
• Remedy Injunction v. Forfeiting Gift
• Like case involving divorce settlement
  requirement that child be raised in particular
  faith
• Wont impose contempt/criminal sanctions for not
  following religion

78
Badlands DQ4.13? SHAPIRA DISTINCTION 5 ?

• Quaker Men (Maddox) ? v.
• ? Jewish Women (Shapira)
• Why Relevant?

79
Badlands DQ4.13? SHAPIRA DISTINCTION 5 ?

• Quaker Men (Maddox) ? v.
• ?Jewish Women (Shapira)
• Quakers Too Few Available Partners ?
• E.g., you must marry one of the Bronte Sisters ?

80
Shapira v. Union National Bank badlands DQ4.14

• Maddox held that these kinds of conditions
  (partially restricting marriage) are unacceptable
  where there is a sufficiently small number of
  eligible partners.
• How few partners must there be to fail the test?

81
Shapira v. Union National Bank badlands DQ4.14

• Maddox held that these kinds of conditions
  (partially restricting marriage) are unacceptable
  where there is a sufficiently small number of
  eligible partners.
• If you were living in a state with that test, how
  could you prove whether it was met? (Cf.
  Lawyering Q on Final Exam)

82
Shapira v. Union National Bank badlands DQ4.14

• Maddox held that these kinds of conditions
  (partially restricting marriage) are unacceptable
  where there is a sufficiently small number of
  eligible partners.
• Assuming that some partial restraints on marriage
  are allowed, is the Maddox rule a good result?

83
Shapira v. Union National Bank badlands DQ4.14

• Maddox held that these kinds of conditions
  (partially restricting marriage) are unacceptable
  where there is a sufficiently small number of
  eligible partners.
• Good Result?
• Too much restriction on grantee v.
• Grantors Rights (can always argue that grantors
  should be able to dispose of their own property
  as they wish).

84
Questions on Shapira?